Pat Buchanan and the Diesel Exhaust ControversyBy Friedrich Paul Berg IN HIS MARCH 4, 1996 column in Newsweek magazine, George F. Will attacked Patrick J. Buchanan for his March 17, 1990 column about Diesel exhaust. Buchanan had written: "Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody. In 1988, 97 kids trapped 400 feet underground in a Washington, D.C., tunnel while two locomotives spewed diesel exhaust into the car, emerged unharmed after 45 minutes." Will claimed Buchanan had relied on a publication specializing in Holocaust denial as a source for his anecdote. The story did not come from revisionists; the actual source was probably the Washington Post story of May 13, 1988 entitled: "5th Graders' Trip Turns to Terror in Train Tunnel." The train was stalled for forty minutes inside a 3900 feet long tunnel. Although one Diesel engine was shutdown almost immediately after an emergency brake had been pulled, the remaining Diesel continued to operate for seven minutes before it was also shutdown. Unfortunately, this also turned off the electricity and the train's air circulation system and led to smoke entering the cars. A total of 402 passengers were trapped inside the tunnel. Although two pupils were seriously affected and about 25 received first aid with some even going to hospitals, no permanent injury was reported--and no deaths. The only reason Will gave for his insistence that Diesels were used for mass murder was an article by Jacob Weisberg which appeared in the New Republic on October 22, 1990, pp. 22-27. Will quoted Weisberg as follows: "Carbon monoxide emitted by diesel engines is sufficient to asphyxiate people when they are crammed by the hundreds into thirteen-foot chambers. According to the 'Encyclopedia of the Holocaust' suffocation at Treblinka took as much as half an hour; Buchanan's comparison only proves that the children he described had sufficient oxygen to survive whatever length of time they were trapped in the tunnel."
Diesel exhaust for mass murder would have been made
no sense at all. That is already obvious when one understands the differences
between Diesels and gasoline engines. However, it all becomes rather
dramatic when one learns that the Germans actually used far more lethal
concentrations of CO to drive more than 500,000 motor vehicles including
some of their Tiger tanks--and that the gas was actually generated on
the vehicles themselves from wood, charcoal or coal. For the vast majority
of vehicles, only wood was used. The vehicles (Holzgaswagen)
were all fitted with producer gas generators (Holzgasgeneratoren)
so as to conserve liquid fuels--gasoline and Diesel fuel--for the military.
All persons authorized to drive producer gas vehicles were specially
trained and licensed and had to keep notices within the drivers' compartments
reminding them not only that the gas contained as much as 35%CO--but
also, reminding them that as little as 0.1% CO could be fatal. Those
warnings were required reading by law. They were not just for the protection
of the environment--they were essential for the very survival of the
drivers and everyone else who had to to work with this extremely dangerous
technology day in and day out. Figure
1. - "Strength through Gas:" --this logo was used to promote the
voluntary conversion of motor vehicles from liquid fuels to producer
gas, especially during 1942 and 1943. The German words "Kraft durch
Gas" were obviously chosen to resemble the popular slogan "Kraft durch
Freude (Strength through Joy)" which had already been widely used in
NS Germany for party programs to improve the lives of German workers
through recreation, especially travel throughout Europe. Initially,
the conversion was voluntary, driven by market forces such as the prices
of woodchips versus liquid fuels,-- but as the war went on, more and
more classes of vehicles had to be producer gas-driven by law. In September
1943, Albert Speer issued a decree requiring that all civilian buses,
trucks and motor vehicles, regardless of size, be producer gas-driven.The slogan could just as well have read: "Strength through Poison Gas" because the gas was extremely toxic containing between 18% and 35% CO. For their own personal safety, everyone involved had to know that. If there had been any kind of extermination program employing CO and gaschambers, the irony of the slogan would have been all too obvious and quite unbearable. The producer gas vehicles and their development are discussed in some detail in a postwar book which is recommended by the German Museum, the German equivalent of the Smithsonian Museum. See: Erik Eckermann, Alte Technik mit Zukunft--die Entwicklung des Imbert-Generators (Old Technology with a Future) (München: Oldenbourg Verlag GmbH, 1986). The wartime German literature on this technology is enormous. It can generally only be found, however, in German libraries in Europe since the Allies, particularly the Americans, had no incentive to loot German libraries and industry of the producer gas literature after the war. Such looting would have led to at least some of the materials gradually appearing in American libraries--that's the way things generally worked with other kinds of German technical literature. The producer gas literature was generally left behind because America had something far superior to producer gas and that was petroleum--in huge abundance, and therefore no abiding interest in the superb technology Germany had developed to sustain itself throughout the war without petroleum. No doubt, if this essay has any impact at all, one can expect new legislation in Germany to suppress all knowledge of the wartime use of producer gas; all access to the relevant literature will soon be limited to groups and individuals who demonstrate a total commitment to the holocaust legend. The hooligans running Germany today are quite shameless. One should bear in mind that the evidence of Diesels for mass murder is only from "survivors" testimony or from so-called "confessions." Those accounts are so thoroughly flawed that they can not possibly be based upon any direct knowledge of the alleged events. The best example of such testimonies, despite many outrageous errors, is the so-called "Kurt Gerstein Statement;"-- the rest of the testimonies are far worse. The trial of John Demjanjuk was billed as the most important "showtrial" since that of Adolf Eichmann and a great learning experience for all Israelis. It was held in a large auditorium so that large numbers of people could be brought in to watch in the courtroom as well on TV. Despite claims that the evidence was overwhelming, it was the four so-called "eyewinesses" on whom the Israeli court, according to its own verdict statement, based its initial verdict of "guilty"--and on nothing else. Demjanjuk had supposedly operated the Diesel used to murder 800,000 people at Treblinka. Subsequently however, the Israeli court conceded that it could not convict Demjanjuk on the basis of those testimonies and let him return to the USA. The lies contained in those "eyewitness" testimonies were too absurd even for an Israeli court. Without so much as even one shred of hard evidence, or forensic evidence, or German wartime documents, or a murder weapon that makes any kind of common sense--the Diesel extermination stories should be totally rejected. Fifty years of war crimes trials and intense Jewish "scholarship" have produced "mush." Diesel gassings never happened! Buchanan was wrong on a few details but he was right on target generally. Buchanan deserves the highest praise and respect for his courageous stands against hate peddlars like George F. Will and Jacob Weisberg. As the Diesel myth falls, so falls the entire extermination story. The true hatemongers know this and, therefore, they must defend their absurd story with ever more extreme forms of censorship and suppression including, at this very moment, imprisonment of the revisionists--and especially in Germany. *Some information about the Nocht-Giemsa process is given in: Ludwig Gassner, "Verkehrshygiene und Schädlingsbekämpfung" (Transportation Hygiene and Disinfestation)" Gesundheits-Ingenieur, Vol 66 (1943) Heft 15, p. 175. An English translation appears as Appendix B in: F. P. Berg, "Typhus and the Jews," Journal for Historical Review, (Torrance, CA: Institute for Historical Review, Winter 1988-9) pp. 468-75. See especially page 472 where the Nocht-Giemsa process is described as "very practical' (sehr gebräuchlich). An excellent book which is now thoroughly suppressed and banned in Germany is: Ernst Gauss, Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte (Fundamentals of Contemporary History), (Tübingen: Grabert-Verlag, 1994). To get some impression regarding the vast extent of the German wartime literature on producer gas, one can read the following examples:
[This work was published in The Revisionist No. 2, January 2000] |
|
Committee for Open
Debate on the Holocaust, Bradley R. Smith, Director
- Post Office Box 439016, San Ysidro, CA 92143 |